Why would Goodell purposely try to tank one of his own teams if he didn't have proof? You guys are not thinking this through properly. The NFL wouldn't sully a member of it's own organization unless they were doing something improper.

Like how the Jets stated that needed to take Reggie Bush out of the game of the Dolphins?

__________________
The whole world loves neophyte athletic tight end Jimmy Graham from Miami with the 95th pick. "Best pick in the draft,'' one AFC coach told me. "Give him time, and in that offense, he'll be better than [Jeremy] Shockey by the start of next year.''

“We know that no matter the adversity, be it the lockout, be it the suspension or be it a hurricane, our men will pull together and defend the honor of this city. We’ve shown we’ve been able to do that.” - Jabari Greer

Apparently, they have a sworn affidavit from Gregg Williams and Mike Cerullo as well as a ledger that the affidavits say ties players to pay for play/injure. They have a ton of additional (circumstantial) evidence of similar systems being run at previous locations where Gregg Williams was coaching.

What they seemingly don't have is a smoking gun pointing to individual players. (though, the clip of "give me my money" does point in that direction).

The Bills and Redskins were cleared of conducting any bounty systems when Gregg Williams was there.

All they have is very circumstantial evidence that can't be pinned on any player in particular and won't hold up in federal court.

If Goodell loses in federal court and the penalties stemming from a bounty system were handed down without solid evidence then full reinstatement and restitution for everyone involved should be in order. At least I would think.

If Goodell loses in federal court and the penalties stemming from a bounty system were handed down without solid evidence then full reinstatement and restitution for everyone involved should be in order. At least I would think.

You've misunderstood what that ruling was about.

The court said that Goodell had to clarify if he was punishing for "salary cap issues" or for a system of intent to injure. The court effectively said he had no grounds to punish for intent to injure (that's a court matter), the penalties were thus lifted. The ruling on the Vilma vs Goodell case hasn't been ruled on [that ruling is due next week].

The court never said that Goodell couldn't turn around and re-suspend them for "salary cap violations". Goodell isn't doing that because he knows it will just end up in court again. He wants it resolved.

I agree with you that the issues surrounding the players is different than the one surrounding the coaches (though, outside of the court... it's perfectly obvious that if one did it the other had to have done it). The NFL needs to show what evidence it has tying pay for performance to specific players, which is why Vilma launched his suit.

I just want to make this perfectly clear: There has not been (and may never be at this rate) a court case weighing the league's case which they used to suspend players in this matter. The cases so far have been far more nuanced than that.

In the 1996 playoffs, Hall of Fame Packers defensive end Reggie White made a deal with his teammates: Make a big hit, and I’ll give you $500.

In its latest filing in the bounty case, a copy of which PFT has obtained, the NFLPA says that the NFL knew White was paying teammates for hits and allowed it to continue, and therefore is showing inconsistency now by suspending four players for a similar pay-for-performance program with the Saints.

The filing from the NFLPA in the bounty case discusses White’s “Smash for Cash” program, which included $500 payments for big hits. At the time, according to the NFLPA, the NFL said the program was OK “as long as players use their own money, amounts are not exorbitant and payments aren’t for illegal hits.”

The NFLPA says that the NFL’s rules haven’t changed since then, but the NFL’s PR agenda has.

“The fact that the NFL has a different agenda today than in 1996 can’t change the unequivocal language of the NFL Constitution and Bylaws, which has never prohibited this behavior,” the NFLPA says in its filing.

Although White’s “Smash for Cash” program hasn’t often been brought up in connection with the Saints bounty case, White’s actions were no secret at the time. ESPN did a segment on White’s bonuses, the New York Daily News ran a headline declaring that White had offered to pay bounties, and in an Associated Press article from January of 1996, White is quoted as saying he handed out his entire $13,000 playoff bonus for a win over the 49ers to teammates.

“I gave them money for big hits,” White said. “I don’t know if the money is any more motivation, but I know I paid out a lot.”

The Associated Press article says that White had already told his teammates it would be the same deal for the next playoff game, against the Cowboys, and that NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said there was nothing wrong with what White did, likening it to a quarterback buying gifts for his offensive linemen.

They're two completely different cases. White was paying for big hits. Vilma put up money to purposely injure someone and take them out of the game. Do you really not see the difference? Of course you do, you're just being a ridiculous homer again.

They're two completely different cases. White was paying for big hits. Vilma put up money to purposely injure someone and take them out of the game. Do you really not see the difference? Of course you do, you're just being a ridiculous homer again.

There's no difference and you know it. You're just being a ridiculous hater again. That's all Vilma did. So there's a difference if those big hits white paid for knocked someone out of a game?

They're two completely different cases. White was paying for big hits. Vilma put up money to purposely injure someone and take them out of the game. Do you really not see the difference? Of course you do, you're just being a ridiculous homer again.

That is the whole issue at hand. Where is the proof that it was to purposefully injure someone? Vilma's camp has done more than a good job showing that this borders on a personal issue with Goodell.

I'm going to laugh when Tagliabue affirms Goodell's decisions, and the players take this to yet another round of appeals. Honestly I have no idea who is right in this situation, but I do find it comical that some people think that this whole situation is some elaborate plot to screw the Saints over.

I'm going to laugh when Tagliabue affirms Goodell's decisions, and the players take this to yet another round of appeals. Honestly I have no idea who is right in this situation, but I do find it comical that some people think that this whole situation is some elaborate plot to screw the Saints over.

I'm going to laugh when Tagliabue affirms Goodell's decisions, and the players take this to yet another round of appeals. Honestly I have no idea who is right in this situation, but I do find it comical that some people think that this whole situation is some elaborate plot to screw the Saints over.

Former Minnesota Vikings defensive lineman Jimmy Kennedy, identified as a "whistleblower" in the New Orleans Saints bounty scandal, called NFL commissioner Roger Goodell a liar in regard to his role in the league's investigation.

Kennedy issued a lengthy statement Friday in response to a recent memo the NFL gave to all teams that listed him as the person who originally told former Vikings coach Brad Childress in early 2010 that the Saints had a bounty on Brett Favre in the 2010 NFC title game.

More on ESPN.com
Former Minnesota Vikings defensive lineman Jimmy Kennedy had some harsh words for Roger Goodell in regard to his handling of the New Orleans Saints bounty scandal, writes Kevin Seifert. Blog

• NFC South blog
"The commissioner of the NFL recently distributed a memo to all 32 NFL teams regarding the alleged Saints bounty program that contained blatant lies about me, thereby adding me to the list of men whose reputations and character have been irreparably damaged by the shoddy, careless, shameful so-called investigation behind this sham proceeding," the statement read. "Roger Goodell identifies me as the 'whistleblower' who approached former Viking coach Brad Childress about an alleged bounty on Brett Favre in the NFC Championship Game.

"That is a lie. I had no knowledge about any alleged bounty to reveal to anyone, and I never informed anyone that I did. Contrary to the false information disseminated by the NFL, coach Childress approached me and asked me if I knew anything about such an allegation, and I told him the truth: I did not. I had no knowledge of any such alleged bounty."

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said in response that, "Jimmy Kennedy and Brad Childress were interviewed separately by our office as part of the investigation. We are confident of the accuracy of the information that has been disclosed."

Kennedy also reiterated that he never discussed the Favre bounty with the NFL.

"Roger Goodell also states that I was interviewed by the NFL about the alleged bounty. That is another lie; I was never interviewed by the NFL, unless the NFL considers two 30-second conversations when I told NFL Security that I had no knowledge of any such allegations 'interviews.' I certainly do not," Kennedy said.

"After the second phone call that I received from NFL, in which I once again told the person that I had absolutely no knowledge of any alleged bounty, I called my agent, who then retained an attorney for me. We informed the NFL Security person that further contact with me should occur through my attorney, and interestingly, we never heard from the NFL again."

Previously, Kennedy vehemently denied via Twitter he had knowledge of any bounty on Favre. The NFL had said former Saints defensive end Anthony Hargrove, suspended in the scandal, informed Kennedy about the bounty on Favre.

"The third lie that Roger Goodell told about me is perhaps the most upsetting because it involves a man for whom I have great respect and affection, Anthony Hargrove," Kennedy said. "The NFL states that Anthony Hargrove told me about the alleged bounty on Brett Favre. That is an utter lie; it simply never happened. I never discussed an alleged bounty with Anthony Hargrove before, during or after the NFC Championship Game. The only discussion I have had with Anthony about the alleged bounty occurred when we recently spoke about the NFL's egregiously flawed and unjust investigation and proceeding.

"I am not one of the players who has been officially disciplined by the NFL as part of this sham, but I now know that I too have been damaged by the NFL's complete disregard for truth and integrity."

Cliffs: Goodell says Jimmy was one of the whistle blowers.
Jimmy is saying Goodell is full of **** and didn't snitch and doesn't know anything about the scandal.
Angry Souless Ginger now rescues himself from bounty scandal.

Tagliabue affirms factual findings of Commissioner Goodell...concludes Hargrove, Smith, Vilma "engaged in conduct detrimental" and vacates all player discipline. "Unlike Saints' broad organizational misconduct, player appeals involve sharply focused issues of alleged individual player misconduct in several different aspects. My affirmation of Commissioner Goodell's findings could certainly justify...the issuance of fines. However, this entire case has been contaminated by the coaches and others in the Saints' organization."